Transcript of "Piia finlandia"

1.
School Choice in Finland The Catholic University of Chile Santiago 15. November 2010 Piia Seppänen post doctoral researcher CELE, University of Turku Finland

2.
The Content <ul><li>1. The policy named school choice in Finland </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Arguments for politics of school choice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A role of school choice policy in comprehensive schooling systems </li></ul></ul>2. Brief features of ‘the lived education markets’ in four Finnish cities, 2000

3.
Arguments for politics of school choice <ul><li>Original ideological hopes for school choice (Friedman & Friedman 1980; Chub and Moe 1990): </li></ul><ul><li>Children from disadvantage areas get option for better schools – Equal opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>Competition of schools drives better services – Quality improvement </li></ul><ul><li> An original idea of vouchers has transformed to versatile applications in schooling reforms of countries </li></ul><ul><li>In Finland either of previous arguments were dominant when school choice policies were discussed in the middle and late of 1990’s. </li></ul><ul><li>Arguments by the Finnish choice policy advocators (Seppänen 2003b): </li></ul><ul><li>Supports pupils’ personal development, talents and inclinations, will boost of motivation - Individuality </li></ul>

4.
The Content <ul><li>1. The policy named school choice in Finland </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Arguments for politics of school choice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A role of school choice policy in comprehensive schooling systems </li></ul></ul>2. Brief features of ‘the lived education markets’ in four Finnish cities, 2000

6.
<ul><li>For every pupil in basic education free of charge, in every school: </li></ul><ul><li>textbooks and other learning materials </li></ul><ul><li>school transport, if journey is over 5 kilometres to a named school </li></ul><ul><li>daily warm school meal </li></ul><ul><li>pupil welfare services (social and health care) </li></ul><ul><li>For the pupils in need of special support all special aids required for participation in education. </li></ul>A national core curricula hours/week: 1-2 grade 19 3-4 grade 23 5-6 grade 24 7-9 grade 30 (inc.13 optional subjects) Total 222 + remedial lessons are available The school year 190 school days, 5 days / week

7.
School choice policy in Finland in relation to features in compulsory schooling A strong tradition of central state governance changed during 1990’s to municipal power with national steering. 3. Governance (state – other actors) Since 1970’s comprehensive, 9 years. No academic or vocational tracks. Comprehensive pupil support free of charge. 2. The structure (comprehensive – parallel) 4. Allocation of pupils to schools (catchment areas – open enrollment) 5. Pupil selection (no selection – total selection) 98% municipal (under 1% state) and 2% subsidised private schools (2008) All free of charge and non-profit organis. 1. Ownership of schools ( public – private) In Finland Features of comp.s. (‘extremes’)

10.
School choice policy in Finland in relation to features in compulsory schooling School choice policy A named school place + pupil can apply to another school A right to a named school, otherwise oversubscription criteria. Pupil selection to so called specialised/emphasised classes (e.g. music, languages, sport, math, art), usually aptitude tests or previous success in particular subjects.  varies between cities 4. Allocation of pupils to schools (catchment areas – open enrollment) 5. Pupil selection (no selection – total selection) 98% municipal (under 1% state) and 2% subsidised private schools (2008) All free of charge and non-profit organis. Since 1970’s comprehensive, 9 years No academic or vocational tracks. Comprehensive pupil support free of charge. A strong tradition of central state governance changed during 1990’s to municipal power with national steering. 1. Ownership of schools ( public – private) 2. The structure (comprehensive – parallel) 3. Governance (state – other actors) In Finland Features of comp.s. (‘extremes’)

13.
Finnish school choice policy <ul><li>in urban areas since the middle of the 1990s </li></ul><ul><li>in publicly run compulsory school system (i.e. ‘choice’ between public schools) </li></ul><ul><li>varies between cities on:  how school places are allocated </li></ul><ul><ul><li>mainly geographical catchment areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>a role of parental preferences over schools vary </li></ul></ul><ul><li> how vastly specialised classes i.e. pupil selection are used </li></ul><ul><li>is different from e.g. England and Wales where ’parental choice’ was a key element of school quasi-markets since 1980’s (involving open enrolment, school autonomy and diversity, per capita funding, privatised provision, accountability mechanisms (e.g. Whitty et al. 1998) and along 2000 expansion of specialisation and privatisation of schools) </li></ul>

15.
On basis of figure 1 an outline of changes in comprehensive school systems of EU member countries from the end of 1970's to the end of 1990's could be named as : <ul><li>Stable selective continental European countries (an exception of France) and Ireland, as well as Northern Ireland </li></ul><ul><li>Southern European comprehensivisation </li></ul><ul><li>Scandinavian change from central to local control with some choice </li></ul><ul><li>British and Dutch institutional autonomy in quasi-markets </li></ul><ul><li>(some countries may make deviations in detail) </li></ul>

16.
The Content <ul><li>1. The policy named school choice in Finland </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Arguments for politics of school choice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A role of school choice policy in comprehensive schooling systems </li></ul></ul>2. Brief features of ‘the lived education markets’ in four Finnish cities, 2000

18.
<ul><li>Popularity of schools divided and application flows were towards centres. On average 1/3 of age cohort applied to another than the allocated school, ½ in the capital city Helsinki </li></ul><ul><li>Families' &quot;self-selection&quot; to the school popularity levels or outside the markets </li></ul><ul><li>Socio-economic profile of schools segregated more strongly according to parental &quot;choices&quot; than based on catchment areas </li></ul><ul><li>The nature of families' preferences to attend to schools seemed to be practical, social and class-related based on open-ended answers in a postal questionnaire </li></ul>Brief features of ‘the lived education markets’ in four Finnish cities, 2000

19.
A mapping of pupils' applications for the 7th grade to other than allocated school between nine schools in a Finnish case city (Seppänen 2003)

20.
<ul><li>Popularity of schools divided and application flows were towards centres. On average 1/3 of age cohort applied to another than the allocated school, ½ in the capital city Helsinki </li></ul><ul><li>Families' &quot;self-selection&quot; to the school popularity levels or outside the markets </li></ul><ul><li>Socio-economic profile of schools segregated more strongly according to parental &quot;choices&quot; than based on catchment areas </li></ul><ul><li>The nature of families' preferences to attend to schools seemed to be practical, social and class-related based on open-ended answers in a postal questionnaire </li></ul>Brief features of ‘the lived education markets’ in four Finnish cities, 2000

21.
Pupils’ applying to the 7th grade to the other than allocated school (popularity type) and those who didn't apply in relation to mother’s education (%) (Seppänen 2006) * those pupils who attended to the catchment area school are emphasized three times, so that the sample represents the population. Mother’s education, N 1490 (2886*), in four cities:

22.
Pupils’ applying to the 7th grade to the other than allocated school (popularity type) in relation to mother’s education (%) (Seppänen 2006) Mother’s education, N 792, in four cities:

23.
<ul><li>Popularity of schools divided and application flows were towards centres. On average 1/3 of age cohort applied to another than the allocated school, 1/2 in the capital city Helsinki </li></ul><ul><li>Families' &quot;self-selection&quot; to the school popularity levels or outside the markets </li></ul><ul><li>Socio-economic profile of schools segregated more strongly according to parental &quot;choices&quot; than based on catchment areas </li></ul><ul><li>The nature of families' preferences to attend to schools seemed to be practical, social and class-related based on open-ended answers in a postal questionnaire </li></ul>Brief features of ‘the lived education markets’ in four Finnish cities, 2000

24.
The Content  conclusions of school choice in Finland <ul><li>1. The policy named school choice in Finland </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Arguments for politics of school choice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A role of school choice policy in comprehensive schooling systems </li></ul></ul>2. Brief features of ‘the lived education markets’ in four Finnish cities, 2000 <ul><li>is applied form different premises than in English-speaking tradition </li></ul><ul><li>but in practise creates socially segregating outcomes </li></ul>